johnc

Heat, tapping, more heat, more tapping, impact gun, more heat, more impact gun, cold chisel... ------------------ John Coffey johnc@betamotorsports.com

240Zs all came with R180 diffs in either 3.36 or 3.54 ratios. No limited slips were ever offered in 240Zs. No 240Z was ever offered in the US by Nissan with a 5 speed, although lots of folks have swapped in 280Z 5 speeds. That may be what's on the 240Z you're looking at. 240Z drivetrains can handle about 300 ft. lbs. of torque and some people even run higher torque levels on the street without problems. You must pay attention to greasing the u-joints, changing diff fluid, making sure the mounts are good, etc. ------------------ John Coffey johnc@betamotorsports.com

You can use 240 (25 spline) or 280 (27 spline) stub axles (and the corresponding companion flange) in either hub, but you have to use the internal spacer specific for the hub you are using. The 240 hubs almost always use the B spacer. I don't know the spacer used for the 280 hub, but it should come with what you've purchased. The 280 stub axles are stronger and have better flange to axle welds (the most common failure point). And, they are still available brand new from Nissan. Unfortunately, the companion flanges are NLA. ------------------ John Coffey johnc@betamotorsports.com

> I will be adding about 1/2 to 1 inch of > rake to the front to rear height though. > Seems the car will do better set up with > a little of the stink bug pose. Go to a good racing suspension/tuning shop in your area and get the car corner weighted and aligned BEFORE you put the rake in. Expect to pay about $300 to have this done. Normally, rake is added to increase traction on the front by moving weight forward (there goes your "50/50" weight distribution). FYI... a 1" rake is a lot. ------------------ John Coffey johnc@betamotorsports.com [This message has been edited by johnc (edited January 03, 2001).]

Locutus, go here: http://www.contour.org Lone, Regarding suspension sophistication in the drag racing environemnt: until recently I felt the same way about it as you. But, a lot has happened in the last few years since the drag racers "discovered" high performance shocks. Bernstien, Force, and many others attirbute most of their drops in ET to suspension tuning. Wayne Scarba and Hal Lees wrote an article in National Dragster "Racing Technology - The hook factor: the ups and downs of shock absorbers" (Issue 15, April 30, 1999) that discusses the importance of shocks. A couple quotes: "...A simple truth in making a Stocker work is that shock absorbers are key. The reason for this is simple: If you can control the wheel motion, then you can control the dynamics of the race car. The better the control of the wheel motion, the better the control of the dynamics of the entire car. Interpretation? In the world of the drag racer, this boils down to refined hook. It also means your tuning capabilities are amplified many fold." "...Once the initial fear factor of working with sophisticated shock absorbers passes, you're going to find out one thing very quickly: Shock absorbers can account for more improvements in performance than any other single component in your race car." ------------------ John Coffey johnc@betamotorsports.com [This message has been edited by johnc (edited January 03, 2001).]

>... the superiority of one layout versus > another is pretty much a wash, with raw > driver talent being perhaps the difference > from one brand to another winning. Exactly! Put Mika or Schuie in a Type R and me in a 328i and I'll be lapped in 10 minutes! ------------------ John Coffey johnc@betamotorsports.com

Ahhhhhh, the old RWD vs. FWD argument... With FWD hondas turning 8's in the 1/4 mile after only 10 years of serious development (the most extreeme example of drivetrain layout supposedly hurting performance), I would think that most folks would understand that drivetrain layout can be compensated for with good suspension tuning. A FWD and a RWD car can both be made to handle equally well on dry pavement as long as horsepower is kept below about 300. Using F1, IRL, CART, NASCAR, etc as justification for the superiority of RWD is a false argument becuase all series have very strict rules requiring RWD (and in some cases banning AWD and FWD). The most valid comparison would be the old British, European, and Australian Touring Car Championships where FWD Hondas, Saabs, Holdens, etc. won a number of races and championships against RWD BMWs, Opels, Volvos, etc. The supposed superiority of RWD comes into play when horsepower levels get high enough to seriously affect tire temperatures. Current racing slicks have trouble coping with tire temps over about 250F degrees. A high horsepower FWD car will easily overheat the front tires under hard cornering and acceleration. Braking is not an issue because both FWD and RWD transfer 80+% of the vehicle weight to the front tires. I do know of a research project using a very sophisticated traction control system that will allow a FWD road race car avoid overheating the front tires while putting out 600+ horsepower. I have no idea of the results of the testing so far, but it makes one think... ------------------ John Coffey johnc@betamotorsports.com BTW... My daily driver is a Ford Contour SVT, probably one of the best handling FWD cars ever sold. [This message has been edited by johnc (edited January 02, 2001).]

You guys might also want to look into the camber plates sold by Erik at EMI Racing. Although it sometimes takes a while to get them (he's a professional racer and is at the Daytona 24 hour test his week) his plates are about the best. They bolt up under the strut tower, don't require any sheet metal work, and also allow caster adjustment. You can reach him at: emiracing@mindspring.com. I don't remember the price, but I guuess its about $250 per pair, with the fronts being a bit more expensive. FYI... these camber plates are the same ones sold by MSA. ------------------ John Coffey johnc@betamotorsports.com

> Okay, still SOME confusion here Removing > material from the spring perch up top will > lower the body but I'd think it would > remove some travel. I'm not real clear > here but I guess removing above where the > spring mounts makes the difference? I'd > still think that would change where the > body sits and move things on the strut > rod.... You're not lowering the body per-se (its a unibody car) you are actually raising the strut into the tower, wich brings the lower control arm and strut rob up a bit in their range of travel. It doesn't reduce available bump travel because the strut (shock) insert is still the limiting factor. The shock will bottom before the lower control arm or the strut rob will bind/bottom. > Looking at them it looks like a MUCH > bigger difference! 1.5inches moves the hub > and body of the car only 3/4 of an inch > upwards, yes? From a ride height perspective, 3/4" is a lot. From a suspension travel perspective, it works out to about 5/8" because of the distance the center of tire is from the lower spring perch. If we are looking at 2" of available bump travel at rest, having to lower the spring perch 5/8" takes away 31% of that! > I had no bumpstops before - I will this > time (sigh). Great idea! On a lowered car you'll destroy the shock or break something without them. > Seems to me that sectioning the struts but > not going shorter on the carts makes the > problem worse. You have to go with shorted shock cartridges if you section the struts. The stock height ones will not fit (except for putting the fronts in the sectioned rear struts). > Lowering the car via coilovers but not > sectioning the strutscarts is bad too. Not true. Its not a bad idea. You just need to be aware of the reduced bump travel and make the appropriate allowances in vehicle setup and how you drive. Putting in a good set of bump stops (the progressive urethane ones are the best) to protect the suspension is important. Not hitting railroad tracks at 80 mph is important too. > This is a street car. I've got no idea now > what to do except maybe put it together > and let it eat - hopefully not struts! Sorry to get your head all screwed up. Sometimes benchracing makes people (like me) point out minor things as if they are important. Again, set it up with stock length struts, the coil-overs, and the shocks you have (make sure you replace the bad ones). Put in good bump stops and slowly work down on the ride height (over a few weeks time) until you hit a good compromise between looks and driveability. ------------------ John Coffey johnc@betamotorsports.com

Ya know... If you isolated a racing camber plate from the strut tower by sandwiching a piece of high-density rubber sheet about 1/8" thick betwwen it and the tower sheet metal, I bet you can kill a lot of the road noise. The bolt holes for the camber plate would have to be oversize and you would have to put isolator sleeves on the bolts themselves. Similar to how the heater fan mounts in its housing. And you would have to test it on a skid pad or on a race track in case my idea is dangerous... ------------------ John Coffey johnc@betamotorsports.com

I didn't mean to stir up a bunch of confusion with my post about sectioning struts. In general, that's really something only racers do in conjunction with camber plates, offset bushings or monoballs, high spring rates, and other serious suspension changes. Its really not something you would do on a steeet driven Z because your ride height at the rocker panels will be between 5 and 6". In Nion's original post he states he's using 150/175 lb in. springs. Those are too soft for that low of a ride height and the car will be bottoming out constantly. Switching to a racing camber plate will lower the car 1 to 2" without affecting suspension travel, but it will increase the suspension noise inside the car. Also, most of the racing camber plates I've seen require a 2.5" coil-over spring kit. Racers generally want a car as low as possible given the rules and track conditions, but they also want suspension travel because compliance = traction. That's why struts are sectioned on 240Zs. FYI... good camber plates use Torington bearings in the front to allow the strut to pivot. IMHO... I know a number of people install coil-over kits to lower their car, but that's like using a sledge hammer to drive a nail. ------------------ John Coffey johnc@betamotorsports.com

Hi Pete, Be careful, most people consider me infamous and generally deny any knowledge of my existence. FYI... I'm "johnc" on this board and I've noticed HybridZ also has a "John C" from the Great White North. Hopefully that doesn't lead to a besmirching of his reputation. ------------------ John Coffey johnc@betamotorsports.com

If you're running a Holley 4 barrel this sounds like a classic power valve problem. The engine makes power on the initial squirt from the accelerator pump but then bogs waiting for the additional fuel flow that the power valve is supposed to provide. If you've ever run the engine lean and had it backfire through the carb, the power valve is probably blown. Or maybe you just need to try different power valves to see which works best on your engine. Oops! I just read the original post a little more thoroughly. Igonore my irrelevant Hollay post... ;-( ------------------ John Coffey johnc@betamotorsports.com [This message has been edited by johnc (edited December 27, 2000).]

Anyone installing a coil-over suspension setup should seriously consider shortening the struts. Wayne Burnstien posted the most lucid description of the process and why it should be done. I'm reposting it below: ***** Lowering an early Z Let's start by defining the task at hand. We want to lower the car in order to lower the center of gravity. I'll skip all the analysis on why we want to do this because there are lots of good books on the subject, and confine my comments to what you might run into in performing this on a Z. First I need to define a couple of terms: Bump -- suspension travel in the compression direction (i.e. the result of hitting a high spot in the road). Rebound -- suspension travel in the opposite direction (i.e. the result of going over a hill and the wheels leaving the ground). The first problem we run into is that when we shorten the springs, we are reducing the available bump travel in the strut cartridges by the same amount we lowered the car. With all the travel available in a stock Z, this is not too much of an issue when we lower the car only an inch or so. For those of us who are racing our cars, we often lower them much more; for instance, in the SCCA's IT class, we are allowed to lower the car until the rockers are no lower than 5" above the ground. This causes a problem because the suspension is almost fully compressed when the car is sitting at rest. When you hit a bump, the suspension quickly bottoms out (hopefully on a bump stop of resilient material). This is a real problem because in effect, the spring rate increases very dramatically and negates all of our efforts to drive the car smoothly. When driving at or near the limit, this often is the beginning of a very impressive crash. Well, we now have the car at the desired ride height, but need to increase the travel in bump. The way to do that is to shorten the struts. Now things get pretty messy. Don was correct in stating that this is dependent on the length of the struts; however, this is only partly true. The struts need to be long enough to insert the cartridges of choice. For racing, the ones that I would recommend are Carerra, Koni, or Tokico, in that order ( this should cause a bit of discussion on its own). If we automatically shorten the strut to exactly fit the cartridge, we might actually shorten it too much. This leaves us without adequate rebound travel. Just in case this does not scare you, it should. I learned my lesson the hard way when I had the rear wheels pick off the ground while cresting a hill that had a slight turn to it. That made for a looooong full lock slide at 100 MPH! Ok, now we need to decide just how much we want to shorten the strut housing. The desired end result is to have about equal bump and rebound travel. In other words, when the car is sitting at rest, we want the struts half way compressed. On a street car, this is fairly easy to do, because we generally set the car up once and never play with it. Race cars are another situation entirely. First of all, different tires require different ride heights -- for instance, switching from 60 series to 50 series tires lowered my car by .75", causing me to have to raise the car by the same amount. We also play with spring rates, and assuming that we are using coil overs, need to keep the spring collar low enough on the strut housing to avoid it interfering with suspension travel. The bottom line is that before cutting anything off your struts, you should carefully think about what you anticipate doing to the car over the next few years as far as tire/wheel, strut, spring or ride height changes, and then come up with a compromise that works for you. FWIW, most people shorten struts 1-2". If you figure out that you want to go more than this, recheck everything before cutting. Yes, you can add a section, but speaking from experience, it is much easier to remove than to add. I almost forgot to mention this, but if your strut housing is longer than the cartridge, you need to put a spacer below the cartridge inside the housing -- typically, these are just pieces of tubing that is slightly smaller in diameter than the inside dimension of the housing. Just a couple of tips to consider: 1) The best way I have figured out to cut the struts is to use a large pipe cutter. This gives a fairly straight cut with minimal cleanup -- you need to grind the burr off the inside of the housing and bevel the outside edge before welding them together. Be careful not to make the cut so high on the strut that you hit the threads for the gland nut! 2) To remove the original spring perch, the quickest way I have found is to cut through it just above the housing with a grinder or cut-off tool, and then grind the remaining metal off. I found it much easier to do this before cutting the strut because even though I was not cutting the section with the perch off, it did interfere with the cutter. 3) After lowering the car, you need to align the suspension because you have added negative camber at both the front and rear wheels. Of course, you should probably do this any time you remove suspension components anyway. Sorry to be so long winded, but this is a fairly complicated task to plan and implement without too much trial and error. Wayne Burstein ***** As you can see, adding a coil-over suspension and getting the most out of it is not an easy task. Put a lot of though into it before you get out the cutters and welders. ------------------ John Coffey johnc@betamotorsports.com

Actually, the easiest way to build in a cage is to cut the roof off the car! Saw it done that way for a cage in an EP 240Z and for a GT2 944. Pretty scary, but if the car is stripped and setup on a jig then its no big deal. ------------------ John Coffey johnc@betamotorsports.com

Axis is not involved int eh development of these struts. We are working with the Penske folks in Pennsylvania and England. This setup is absolutely not for daily driver street cars, but if you are building the ultimate Z, drove it only on the weekends and to events, and money was no object then you might want to buy this setup. There are probably only 5 or 10 racers in the country that would consider this suspension setup and they really have to be running in EP or GT2. This setup is legal for SCCA Solo2 BSP, SCCA ITE, and NASA SU. They can be made legal, with a threaded collar, for SCCA ITS and NASA PS1. The strut design that we've done will also work with Ohlins and JRZ and we are talking with Ohlins right now. BTW... this strut design will work on most any other strut equipped vehicle. We were smart enough not to bet the farm on the 240Z market. There are bascially two versions of the Penske racing shocks (excluding specific applications for circle track, motorcycles, etc.) - the 8100 series double adjustable and the 8760 series triple and quadruple adjustable. But with all the shaft, valving, can, tube, end caps, etc. you can build what ever you want at just about any price (from $600 each on up to $2,500+). ------------------ John Coffey johnc@betamotorsports.com

"Way, way, way rude cubed" would be the best description if $100 a corner is your price limit. Erik hasn't nailed down the final price yet so I'm not going to say anything more. The package will include his camber plates, all spring perches, Hypercoil springs in your choice of rates, the Penskes, the special valving, and all the machining and welding that goes into the thing. The major cost is the Penske shocks. These are the exact same shocks that are run on CART, NASCAR, NHRA, IRL, ALMS, and other very fast race cars. You can go here and get an idea: http://www.penskeshocks.com/8760.htm. I think Erik can also do the package with the Penske 8100 double adjustable shocks which would save some money. I'll have more information about how much they help at the end of January 2001. (Sorry for all the edits, Hive com two deepend on spiel chockers...) ------------------ John Coffey johnc@betamotorsports.com [This message has been edited by johnc (edited December 18, 2000).] [This message has been edited by johnc (edited December 18, 2000).]

This is my first post on any message board or list regarding some engineering Erik Messley and I have been doing. Since June of this year we have been doing a lot of design and fabricating on the 240Z suspension to make a set of triple adjustable, remote resivior Penske 8760 shocks fit. We've got it worked out and will have them on my 1970 240Z by the end of this month. I'll be renting Buttnwillow Raceway in Bakersfield for a day or two in January to do most of the development and tuning of the basic valving package. These are not strut inserts but complete struts using the Penske threaded shock bodies. They are small enough in diameter to allow use of 2.25" coil overs. Right now we are guessing that we can save about 10 pounds of unsprung weight on each corner of the car. The weight savings plus the triple adjustability (slow bump, fast bump, and rebound) should make this setup the best you can put on a Z. I'll be running my car in the local Cal Club autox series and will probably take the car to the Nationals next September. It will be almost impossible to beat the C4 Corvettes and the newly moved E36 M3 in BSP, but maybe we can scare them. If anyone is interested in this suspension setup, let me know. FYI... they are VERY expensive. ------------------ John Coffey johnc@betamotorsports.com [This message has been edited by johnc (edited December 18, 2000).]